* * * 19990902 Thursday

Subject Line: "329 lose positions at Sabre Group; wide-ranging layoffs are effective immediately"--[RSM] These were not contractors; they were "real" employees[Economy/jobs]

Hmmmm... Real employees losing their real jobs--pre-Y2K--to "expand" business!?! Smells more like "due diligence" in the face of a company's imminent Y2K implosion. We'll see more of this in days ahead.

Contractors are expendable. "Real" systems employees know the business _and_ their systems. Who they gonna call 01/01/00 for fantasy plans of FOF?

Anyone else seeing evidence of this nature in their own company?

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

< http://www.star-telegram.com/news/doc/1047/1:BIZ32/1:BIZ32083199.html >

Updated: Tuesday, Aug. 31, 1999 at 22:53 CDT

329 lose positions at Sabre Group; wide-ranging layoffs are effective immediately By D'Ann Mabray Shippy Star-Telegram Staff Writer

FORT WORTH -- The Sabre Group Holdings, the world's largest travel reservation and technology company, notified 329 employees yesterday that their jobs had been eliminated, effective immediately.

The layoffs, which dropped 216 of the company's 6,339 Fort Worth-Dallas employees, represent about 3 percent of Sabre's 11,000 total workers. Some employees in Tulsa, Okla., Winston-Salem, N.C., and Washington, D.C. also lost their jobs, company representative Maria Stokes said.

The cuts were not completely unexpected.

Sabre Chief Executive Michael Durham said in July that it might be necessary to eliminate jobs in the company's sales and marketing, product development and delivery departments in order to improve margins later in the year.

When workers were notified yesterday, Durham called it a difficult decision for Sabre management.

"These were our co-workers, friends and family," Durham said.

Affected employees left work yesterday with severance packages based on their time with the company, Stokes said.

"They were based on tenure, and affected managers and employees at all different levels," Stokes said.

Many of those let go yesterday had been working on at least two projects nearing completion: the conversion of US Airways' operations to Sabre's specialized software systems, and the protection of Sabre's computers against Year 2000 computer problems, Sabre officials said.

It is not uncommon for employees working on Y2K computer problems to lose their jobs once the task is completed, said Everett Lee, a branch unit manager in Dallas for Romac International, a nationwide information-technology recruiting firm.

"Generally, when everything is compliant, then everybody gets to go on home," Lee said.

Luckily for the local Sabre workers who lost their jobs, other local employers are looking to hire, Lee said.

"The unemployment rate is very low, so employers are still looking for people," Lee said. "[The Sabre workers] should not have a terrible problem finding another opportunity."

The layoffs were intended to bring costs more in line with revenue, Durham said.

"Having taken this difficult step, we are confident that Sabre is well-positioned for growth," Durham said.

Although Sabre's net income slipped slightly in the second quarter because of a one-time accounting charge, its operating earnings were up 11 percent. The company's net income was $63 million in the second quarter, or 48 cents a share, compared with $69 million, or 53 cents a share, a year ago. And revenue totaled $639 million, up 10.8 percent from $577 million a year ago.

Sabre plans to build a $375 million, six-building headquarters campus at Solana office park along Texas 114 in Southlake that could span 2 million square feet and eventually employ 15,000 workers.

D'Ann Mabray Shippy, (817) 685-3851

Send comments to mabray@star-telegram.com

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), September 02, 1999

Answers

"It is not uncommon for employees working on Y2K computer problems to lose their jobs once the task is completed"

This is a real bad trend to be starting. As soon as the VERY sophisticated Y2K workforce starts to figure this out, they are going to demand long term contracts or leave before completion. We are seeing this happen nowon Y2K contracts where management makes stupid similar comments to the staff.

BAD BAD BAD

-- ng (cantprovvideemail@none.com), September 02, 1999.

I'm a recruiter as well as managing a Temporary Employment Service.

I don't know how we are going to keep track of people and contact them next year.

Personally, I'd rather keep the payroll padded just a bit.

In fact, I don't know how my industry is going to function at all next year if things get much worse than a 7.

A shame, we have a lot of the information and the experience to juggle people to jobs. If we have the people who can do the jobs. Not a lot of manual bookkeepers out there nowadays.

-- Jon Williamson (jwilliamson003@sprintmail.com), September 02, 1999.

Strikes me that if any company lays off its Y2K team (or parts thereof) it is a very great statement of confidence by the company. If they are right, it merely saves 3 months' salaries. If they are wrong ... and any old fool can do this upside/downside comparison.

I'd call this good news (unless I were one of those employees). The company is extremely certain that it's done. Only way I can see to put a doomer spin on this is to assert that the management are utterly clueless. (The conspiracy theory, that they know they are hosed, doesn't fit: it's far more likely that an ex-employee will spill the beans than a current employee).

-- Nigel Arnot (nra@maxwell.ph.kcl.ac.uk), September 02, 1999.

In other words: "Thank you so much for saving our company. Here's your hat, what's your hurry?"

Nigel, if I'm working on Y2K and I get any sense that the management will be laying off people when the work's done, all they'll see is a blur as I quickly make myself scarce. I may also leave a few "mementos" in their system, as "rosemary for remembrance."

-- Mac (sneak@lurk.hid), September 02, 1999.

* * * 19990902 Thursday

Nigel Arnot wrote:

"Strikes me that if any company lays off its Y2K team (or parts thereof) it is a very great statement of confidence by the company."

[RMangus]

1. The Sabre Y2K team were full-time employees that worked other development/maintenance projects BEFORE they were dragged kicking and screaming into the Y2K projects "dungeon.!"

2. If Sabre had such tremendous "confidence," why not re-assign these programmers to projects they were working on before their Y2K diversions? Deduction: There may be no reason to pursue the previous projects if their headed down the Y2K "toilet" anyway.

"If they are right, it merely saves 3 months' salaries. If they are wrong ... and any old fool can do this upside/downside comparison. I'd call this good news (unless I were one of those employees). The company is extremely certain that it's done. Only way I can see to put a doomer spin on this is to assert that the management are utterly clueless. (The conspiracy theory, that they know they are hosed, doesn't fit: it's far more likely that an ex-employee will spill the beans than a current employee).

-- Nigel Arnot"

[RMangus] It's clearly apparent that Sabre perceives there is no _future_ ( post-Y2K! ) business case/justification to re-assign these pre-Y2K project productive 329 employees--NOT CONTRACTORS--to their previous business systems areas. The employees have a severance package to console them; probably signed "Y2K"-related _non- disclosure_ pacts before getting the boot out the door. There won't be whistleblowers while the jurisprudence system is functional.

Nigel, your naivete is only exceeded by your Y2K optimism.

The Y2K handwriting is on the wall. Private and government entities are in the hold your breath to stave off Y2K panic to the very 11th hour, until T-Y2K-SHTF! Then the antecedents won't matter.

My caveat to this prevailing PR attitude is:

Y2K MALFEASANCE SHALL NOT BE FORGOTTEN!!

Regards, Bob Mangus

* * *

-- Robert Mangus (rmangus1@yahoo.com), September 02, 1999.

Nigel you twit are you a phm :)

I used to work for sabre, they are clueless in the management dept., this does not surprise me in the least as they are notorious hire and fire merchants...

basically a bullshit outfit to work for - they have no loyalty, so why should you give them any...

par for the course for Sabre I'm afraid...

-- Andy (2000EOD@prodigy.net), September 02, 1999.